Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

STATE OF MISSOURI, RESPONDENT, v. ALFRED HANSSON, JR., APPELLANT. ALFRED HANSSON, JR., APPELLANT,

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his convictions for kidnapping and armed criminal action and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm pursuant to Rule 30.25(b) and Rule 84.16(b).

We further find no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion in Defendant's direct appeal. Rule 30.25(b). Nor would an opinion in Defendant's appeal of his rule 29.15 motion have precedential value. Rule 84.16(b). Therefore, we affirm by order. We have provided the parties with a memorandum for their use only.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. HANSSON
(Dec 16, 1993)